President Eisenhower’s Great Granddaughter Speaks About His Meeting With Extraterrestrials

Dwight David Eisenhower was one of the highest ranking American generals in United States history. He also served as the country’s 34th president, spending eight years in office; before that, he served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe during World War II. His military career was long and extensive, and if anyone knows anything about supposed extraterrestrial beings and the UFO phenomenon, it would definitely be him; he would, after all, be taking the place of Harry S. Truman, who was president while Eisenhower was Supreme Commander, and who, after being asked if he had been briefed on the topic of Unidentified Flying Objects, stated on live television:

Oh yes we discuss it at every conference that we had with the military, and they never were able to make me a concrete report on it. . . . There’s always things like that going on, flying saucers and they’ve had other things, you know.” (source)

If we fast forward to more than 50 years later, one thing has become extremely obvious: UFOs are an international phenomenon, and they have gained the attention of governments, intelligence agencies, and military agencies around the world, particularly since so many military encounters have been recorded.

“The nations of the world are currently working together in the investigation of the UFO phenomenon. There is an international exchange of data. Maybe when this group of nations acquires more precise and definite information, it will be possible to release the news to the world.”

– General Carlos Castro Cavero, Spanish Air Force General (a statement given to the world in the 1970s)

Some startling examples of UFO encounters were outlined by Dr. Jacques Vallee, a scientist notable for co-developing the first computerized mapping of Mars for NASA, and for his work at SRI International on the network information center for ARPANET, a precursor to the modern Internet, in a paper he published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration titled “Estimates of Optical Power Output in Six Cases Of Unexplained Aeriel Objects With Defined Luminosity Characteristics.” (source)(source)

These objects are commonly witnessed by military pilots and tracked on both air and ground radar simultaneously. They are seen performing maneuvers that defy our current understanding of physics. As outlined in the publication above, often when pilots enter the vicinity of these objects, their critical instrumentation and electronics systems all go offline.

One classic example comes from the Iranian Air force, who dispatched two F-4 fighter jets to check out an unexplained flying object. The United States took this encounter very seriously, sending a report of what happened to multiple national security officials and to U.S. President Gerald R. Ford, CIA Director George Bush, and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, among others. Both of the F-4 interceptor pilots reported seeing the object visually, and it was also tracked on their airborne radar. Both planes experienced their critical instrumentation and electronics go offline at a distance of twenty-five miles from the object. Here is an excerpt from the report:

As the F-4 approached a .range of 25 NM he lost all instrumentation and communications (UHF and intercom). He broke off the intercept and headed back to Shahrokhi. When the F-4 turned away from the object and apparently was no longer a threat to it the aircraft regained all instrumentation and communications. . . .

The object and the pursuing F-4 continued on a course to the south of Tehran when another brightly lighted object, estimated to be one half to one third the apparent size of the moon, came out of the original object. This second object headed straight toward the F-4 at a very fast rate of speed. The pilot attempted to fire an AIM-9 missile at the object but at that Instant his weapons control panel went off and he lost all communications (UHF and Interphone). (source)

The report also described how a smaller object detached from the bigger object, turned inside the arc of the F-4 itself, and then regained the original object. This incident lasted for several hours.

What’s more, on top of all these files and publications, which number in the thousands, we have files from intelligence agencies like the FBI showing heavy interest from some very high level people about extraterrestrial bodies and space craft.

For example, HERE (on pages 21/22) is a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document addressed to “certain scientists of distinction,” to “aeronautical and military authorities,” and to “a number of public officials” regarding a letter from a professor with “several university degrees” and a former “university department head.”

The letter offers details about extraterrestrial bodies and craft, stating that part of the disks carry crews, while others are under remote control; that these visitors are human-like but much larger in size, and that they come from an etheric planet that “students of esoteric matters will understand,” among other details.

Considering the above evidence, combined with the hundreds of statements from high ranking military and political personnel (and more) that are available, it’s difficult to believe there is nothing going on. And if anyone were in a position to know the true story, it would have to be Dwight Eisenhower, which is what makes his story and the supposed meeting he had with extraterrestrials so compelling — provided you keep an open mind when listening.

“Behind the scenes, high ranking air force officers are soberly concerned about the UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe that the unknown flying objects are nonsense.” – Former Head of CIA, Roscoe Hillenkoetter, 1960 (source)

The Eisenhowers

When Laura Eisenhower was asked about her great grandfather and his supposed meeting with extraterrestrial beings, she had this to say:

Well I mean we have to understand that the Second World War wasn’t really won, we were dealing with things like project paperclip, we were dealing with, you know Admiral Byrd in 1947 going to Nazi bases in Antarctica and being defeated, so I mean, all these things were going on underneath… It’s like this whole other reality is going on that we don’t hear about. All of a sudden he’s (Dwight Eisenhower) voted into presidency and, you know, this facade of winning the war, um, you know, begins to just take us further and further away from, you know, the extraterrestrial concept, and what that really means and, you know, what is it really about, what is the interaction. So I would say that he was instrumental in warning us about the military industrial complex, and his integrity and I think the imprint that he left has allowed us to look back and open that door up and, you know, and ask these questions that weren’t asked back then. But my intuitive hit is that, and this is what I’ve gained from the work of Corey Goode, and other whistleblowers that have been connected to the secret space programs, is that the Nordics (extraterrestrial race) were connected to the Germans, and it wasn’t this whole, “Oh, you know, he made a deal with the wrong guys,” it was like, there needed to be so much discernment and clarity about the larger picture, that how can you possibly do that, in those times, I mean, this is what we’re trying to sort out now, is these timelines and the deeper history connected to secret societies, connected to, you know, these deeper ET agendas that have been around for thousands of years. So when it presents itself to a world government, or to these power structures, you know, there’s been pieces put into place specifically on purpose in order to create this outer facade which we read in our history books that have nothing to do with the true history of what is actually going on, and so, by the time this other meeting happened they considered it more of a surrender, because they couldn’t really do much, in 1953 is when the UFOs were flown over the white house, and that’s when they made negations with the Nazis, because they didn’t have a choice. . . .

In February of 2010, Laura also posted a long document on the web describing her own contacts with beings from other worlds. Below is an excerpt:

It seemed clear to me that there were both false abductions (more holographic and communicated to the person through chips), and then there were the real ones—the ones I believe my great-grandfather President Eisenhower confronted, which has been a well-known cover-up. (source)

Apparently at this meeting Eisenhower was forced into an agreement with one race of extraterrestrials involving the exchange of ‘their’ technology for the ability to abduct some of us, examine us, and return us safely with no recollection of these events.

So where did the Eisenhower rumours stem from? Well on December 11th, 1984, a television producer by the name of Jamie Shandera received an envelope that had no return address, with two more envelopes inside and a 35 mm roll of film. The first paper within the envelope was a cover sheet labeled “Top Secret/Majic Eyes Only” and titled “Briefing Document: Operation Majestic 12 Prepared for President-Elect Dwight Eisenhower.” It was dated November 18, 1952. Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter (quoted earlier in the article speaking about UFOs) was listed as the briefing officer, along with President Truman, who established the group under executive order. Other names on the document included General Nathan Twinning, who stated in a declassified intelligence document that “the phenomenon is something real and not visionary or fictitious. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and motion which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly air-craft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically, or remotely.” (1)

The MJ 12 documents go on to describe the known details of the extraterrestrial presence; although they cannot be confirmed as completely authentic, they are no doubt intriguing.

William Cooper, who was a close friend to Jamie Shandera, as well as a Navy officer who himself had experience with the UFO phenomenon, wrote a paper titled “The Secret Government: The Origin, Purpose, and Identity of MJ-12” where he made several revelations. He claimed there were at least 16 downed alien craft, 65 bodies, and one live alien retrieved between 1947 and 1952, and at least 10 more UFO crash retrievals during the Eisenhower years. He also claimed that this secret government was dominated by the CIA and the Air Force, but then went into even greater secrecy in 1952 with the establishment of the NSA, which didn’t become known to the general public until 30 years after its creation. (1)

When I think about the above program, I think of former Canadian Defence minister Paul Hellyer stating that pilots were ordered to “shoot first and ask questions after.” (source)

On a side note, the NSA (and other agencies as well) has also recently released some weird documents without any explanation, like this one that reads “Key To The Extraterrestrial Messages.” These documents reveal, at the very least, that these agencies are actively interested in this phenomenon and devoting significant resources to its study.

Another source sharing details of Eisenhower’s meetings with extraterrestrials is Dr. Michael Salla, a former American University professor who now writes extensively in the UFO field. He has also noted that he wrote to Ike’s son, John S.D. Eisenhower, and asked if there was actually an alien encounter with his father. The response, as Salla reported, was “no.” (source)

You can read Salla’s paper regarding the circumstantial evidence surrounding Eisenhower’s supposed meeting with extraterrestrials on his website HERE.

According to Pentagon consultant and UFO researcher Timothy Good, Eisenhower had meetings with extraterrestrial beings on more than one occasion. (source)

Another source is below: a deathbed testimony given to one of the world’s most notable UFO researchers, Richard Dolan.

Who really knows what happened? All we can do is draw conclusions from the evidence at hand, since we don’t have a statement from Eisenhower himself.

“There are objects in our atmosphere which are technically miles in advance of anything we can deploy, that we have no means of stopping them coming here … [and] that there is a serious possibility that we are being visited and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations. That it behooves us, in case some of these people in the future or now should turn hostile, to find out who they are, where they come from, and what they want. This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation and not the subject of ‘rubishing’ by tabloid newspapers.”

– Lord Admiral Hill-Norton, Former Chief of Defence Staff, 5 Star Admiral of the Royal Navy, Chairman of the NATO Military Committee (source)

To read more of our articles on the topic of UFOs/Extraterrestrials, you can visit the exopolitics section of our website HERE.

Indigenous peoples in Brazil are once again on the front lines today of one of the most brutal attacks on their rights and on the forest in recent history. We’re now seeing the drastic rollback of 30 years of progress on human rights and environmental protection in Brazil under Bolsonaro’s regime, which romanticizes Brazil’s past when military dictatorship took helm and presided over wanton destruction of the forest. The Munduruku people have been resisting encroachment and destruction of their land for centuries, and their fight (along with other indigenous groups and the very spirit of the Amazon jungle itself) is more urgent than ever as Brazil’s government and commercial industries continue to violate with impunity.

The tragedy currently taking place in the Amazon is indicative of a broader cultural problem in regards to our relationship with our planet. 1/5th of all the world’s plants and birds and about 1/10th of all mammal species are found in the Amazon. Earth has lost half its wildlife in the past four decades. Based on an analysis of thousands of vertebrate species by the wildlife group WWF and the Zoological Society of London, our way of life has presided over the destruction of 60% of our animal populations since 1970. The report calculates a global “ecological footprint,” which measures the area required to supply the ecological goods and services humans use. It concludes that humanity currently needs the regenerative capacity of 1.5 Earths to supply these goods and services each year.

With the planet’s population expected to grow by 2.4 billion people by 2050, the challenge of providing enough food, water and energy (while sustaining planetary health) will be difficult. This should be the real “RED ALERT” placated all over the media, as the shocking and rapid decline of planetary biodiversity poses an imminent catastrophe that plagues all of us, requiring urgent and bold alterations to our way of life.

That being said, we have more than enough resources to profit food and shelter to billions of people. Solutions done seem to be the problem, it’s human consciousness, greed and ego.

Outrage is an understandable response to the Amazon crisis, but not sufficient to redress the problem. We need to take individual action in our daily lives by altering our lifestyles. One of the most under-reported aspects of Amazonian deforestation is our addiction to consuming meat. Beef, soy, palm oil and wood drive the majority of tropical deforestation.

Animal agriculture is devastating for the Earth. Raising livestock for meat, eggs and milk uses about 70% of agricultural land, and is a primary factor in the proliferation of deforestation, biodiversity loss, and water pollution.

“1.2 billion farmed animals are slaughtered globally every week for human consumption. In one week, more farmed animals are killed than the total number of people killed in all wars throughout history. Although these animals are treated as commodity, they are — in fact — sentient beings — like your pet cat or dog. We tend to assume that only vegans and vegetarians follow a belief system — but when eating animals is not a necessity (which is the case in much of the world today) — then it is a choice, and choices stem from beliefs. “Carnism” is a dominant philosophy — as eating animals is just the way things are — yet it runs contrary to core human values such as compassion, justice, and authenticity. And so — they need to use defense mechanisms that distort our thoughts and numb our feelings so that we act against our core values without fully realizing what we are even doing.” ~Dr. Melanie Joy

The challenges that face our planet, our indigenous family, and our own imminent future are immense. It is easy to feel discouraged, angry, and hopeless about the state of the world, but the ability to harness humanity’s intelligence, creativity and compassion to steer the planet in a new direction is with us right now. We can take individual responsibility today, which can resonate immediately and create waves of influence that can lead to a collective change in behavior and attitudinal shift towards our relationship with nature and with ourselves. This change starts from within, and this work begins with each of us making the choice to defend and protect this wondrous planet which has so graciously hosted our livelihood.

In Brief

The Facts:

A parent of a child formerly enrolled in the MUSE school in California sent us an email detailing the school's use of the Process Communications Model (PCM), while observing that the school is not as inspiring as their promotional materials suggests.

Reflect On:

How do you know when a fundamentally good idea is going too far?

A cursory glance at the ‘MUSE School,’ co-founded by James Cameron’s wife, and you see an educational institution that aspires to be inclusive, inspiring, and liberating for children of all ages. The motto on their school’s website is “Inspiring and Preparing Young People to Live Consciously with Themselves, One Another, and the Planet.”

There is much to admire about the goals of this school. It started off as a small group of kids whose parents were celebrities, including James Cameron’s own. The focus was a personalized curriculum based on learning through passion projects while being exposed to the practices of environmental sustainability. Since the program has grown, in-house vegan meals have been included in the annual tuition, which ranges from about $22,000 for pre-K children (2.3-4.9 years old) to about $33,000 for high school kids (grades 9-12).

The school was also founded by Suzy Amis Cameron’s sister Rebecca Amis, who was the first head of the school. Rebecca Amis had previously tried to start an early childhood education center called ‘childspot!’ in Witchita, Kansas, which Amis’ then-husband Scott Taylor was to be the business manager for. Surprisingly, there is no searchable information on the internet for childspot!, although our reader did provide this article from 1998 in which plans to start their early childhood education center were mentioned.

Introducing PCM To Students

A little while after co-founding the MUSE school in California, Rebecca Amis installed her new husband Jeff King as head of the school. He brought on board a new ‘communication’ methodology into the classroom. The introduction of this method to children as young as 2 years old is the main subject I will cover here. Instead of describing this methodology myself I will start off with testimony that was emailed to me from the parent of a former student to provide some background and reveal her feelings and experiences around the use of PCM in an academic setting:

“Jeff King is the one who introduced the ‘Process Communication Model’ (PCM) to the school, having himself obtained a master trainer title. Many families at this point left the school, not being comfortable with the idea of their kids being the subject of what was clearly an experiment. The school turned plant-based at the same time so they blamed the drop in numbers to people not being happy with the new menu (which is completely false).

Created by Dr Taibi Kahler, a psychologist from Arkansas, it was designed mainly for the corporate world. According to Kahler, there are six distinct personality types: HARMONIZER, THINKER, PERSISTER, IMAGINER, REBEL, AND PROMOTER. Each of us develops a predominant personality type early in life, and that does not change. It is our basic Personality Type all our lives. Each type has specific Motivators characterized by differences in Character Strengths, Psychological Needs and Perceptions.

Each personality comes with a set of psychological needs and specific communication ‘channels’ which include specific words, tone and facial expressions. Although it was never intended for children, Mr. King decided to make it the innovative tool that would differentiate his school from others.

This sounds all wonderful from the outside. What parent wouldn’t want their kids to have tools that will help them communicate better with one another and the world?

Unfortunately the truth is far from that.

Since the personality test cannot be officially administered to the student until high school, they teach the lower grade students PCM through play and activities. The teachers (some brand new to PCM) use their own judgment to asses the kids’ personality so they can start using their appropriate channels with them. (I have plenty of pictures I can send you giving you examples of how they teach PCM to the kids).

The teachers are constantly applying PCM to the students and using what they believe is their specific channel. In return they expect the kids to respond in the teachers’ own channel. Some are pretty rude and direct and yet the kids are expected to learn to use such language. For example, if the teacher’s channel is “tell”, she expects the students to communicate in sentences that are “tell”. So instead of “may I please have a pencil”, the tell channel will be “give me that pencil”.

I have myself seen teachers snapping at students or at colleagues because they weren’t using the correct channels.

Last year the high school students voted to stop practicing PCM in the high school campus. Unfortunately, the younger children are subjected to this on a daily basis. Each child is labeled a personality type and their behavior is almost always excused to their personality label. The parents take the official PCM personality test and the results are then shared with all the faculty members (the parents are unaware of this and never were asked to sign a release form for that). The staff will then go out of their way to address you in the designated channel as they believe that’s what’s needed to keep you a happy customer.

Issues brought up by the students or their families are disregarded as they are seen as a sign of distress. Once that happens the main focus of the faculty is to get the parent or the child out of the system by using manipulation techniques mixed with PCM jargon.

Kids that are being bullied are made to believe that they are just as much at fault as the bully. Parents are constantly told that there are absolutely no issues to worry about and the ones that dare to protest end up always getting kicked out of school or forced to leave.

Discrimination is obvious based on your personality type, whether it’s a student or parent. There are a couple of personalities that are viewed as more troublesome and risky, and the school is keen to identify those individuals. PCM was born as a tool for the corporate world, not for a school and this is the only school in the world that uses it. It is very much a “cultish” atmosphere. The staff is so concentrated on listening carefully to your words and observing your body language in order to figure out what channel to use and if by any chance you have ‘phased’ to another personality then it becomes impossible to have a real honest conversation. And they do the same with the kids depriving them of an authentic connection or the tools to learn to connect with others.

By third grade kids and parents are in full mode PCM. The kids are robotic and set into their ‘personality’. They have a set language and manners which unfortunately the outside world does not always understand.

I wish you could meet some of the students. Some are like robots, they just seem to repeat scripts. There is no talk of consciousness or free thinking which I guess is ’normal’ in many schools, but PCM is close to brainwashing. It’s like an instruction manual on how you should behave, think and speak.

I watched our own child going through the struggle of mentally detoxing from it once we were out of the school. For a while my child was confused, lost in a way especially when the world didn’t respond to my child’s PCM channel, unable to relate. And we are talking about a healthy bright child with no social or personal issues. And now my child doesn’t even want to hear the word PCM.

In my experience Mr. King (as per the book he published – Beyond Drama) enforces the belief that everyone is okay and there are no issues. In order to stay out of drama, individuals must believe that they are okay and everyone else is okay. So basically there are never any issues. They believe and support that philosophy to an extreme and therefore refuse to really acknowledge any real serious issue brought to them. So they hide the problems hoping time will make them go away without having to act on them.

Naturally when real issues are brought up to him by parents, the concerns are dismissed and seen as a sign of distress of the parent. At this point all effort are made to PCM the parent out of the distress and pretend all is good.

Same for students. He doesn’t for example seem to believe in bullying and I have personally watched a 5th grader who had just been repeatedly teased to tears by a classmate being told that he must have had a part in it to deserve it. Through what appeared in my opinion as clever manipulation, the kid and the parents left the meeting believing that there was no bullying in the first place.

Global Expansion. This year, coinciding with Suzy Cameron’s new book launch (One Meal a day) the school decided to create a new for-profit corporation, MUSE Global. Mr. King is their CEO (while retaining his position of Head of the School at MUSE, which is a non-profit). The company focuses on the expansion of the MUSE School’s model globally. Despite the original school being far from successful (people keep leaving, they are unable to raise funds and students score very poorly academically), they seem to be on a mission to convince the world that their module is the best a child can get. They have already signed an agreement with some investors in China and working on more.

Power, Manipulation and Scare Tactics. Numerous families are not happy but they are too scared to say anything for fear of their kids being kicked out (it has happened to many families that dared to challenge the system, 5 in the past school year alone). Some of those families tried to appeal to the school’s board of directors (a few of the members were MUSE parents themselves). The ones that tried to help those families were forced to leave the school, their kids included. The ones who refused to intervene explained, ‘Nothing we can do, they have us by the balls.”

Unfortunately they know how powerful they are and they appear to be using that power to keep families in a state of fear. Many of the students come from families that are in the show business and nobody wants to be on the wrong side of the Camerons, no matter what their children were put through.”–parent of a former MUSE School student

My Take

We must be careful in discerning one person’s testimony. We must look for signs of an inner consistency, and a plausibility that links facts and observations with the opinions this person holds. For me, this testimony has a high level of consistency, especially around the potential dangers of introducing a fully integrated system of labeling and classifying students and teachers in an academic setting.

“Once you label me, you negate me.”–Soren Kierkegaard

When I was doing my life-coaching training, many of the coaches who had already been working in the corporate world spoke highly of the Myers-Briggs type indicator and other tools that categorized a person’s personality type. As a life coach, I always had a resistance to any form of ‘typing’ of a client into a category. I felt it would limit my perception of a person, affect the ways I would challenge them to see things differently, and, most importantly, could limit the person’s belief in what they were capable of. Even when clients would give me their Myers-Briggs ‘identity,’ (i.e. “I’m an INTJ and that’s why I see things this way…”), I would not seek to capitalize on the information behind the client’s self-classification and would remain present to the identity being revealed through the person words, tone, expressions, and so on. Categorizing oneself as the fundamental guideline of one’s sense of identity is, in my opinion, very limiting.

I understand that these personality-typing tools can have some benefits for allowing managers in the corporate world to understand better what makes each individual employee tick. It can help them accept that people have different strengths and weaknesses, learn in different ways, and get satisfaction in different ways. These insights can lead a manager to work with greater compassion, patience, and flexibility. If the information is used to benefit the employee and enable them to get more satisfaction and fulfillment from their job, leading them to become more productive, then it is a win-win proposition.

However, these tools can very easily be used as means of manipulation in the hands of those who lack maturity or have a hidden agenda to control people rather than act in service to the people they are using these tools on. In a classroom setting with children as young as two, where the foundations of a child’s perception of reality are still in their formative stages, it is reasonable to fear that PCM has the potential to cause harm to a child, perhaps in ways even worse than described above by our parent.

These are subtle matters, but certainly worth thinking about. Below is a clip from a video from the MUSE school which promotes the use of PCM techniques in elementary classrooms.

Does this video leave you with the feeling that empowering communication is going on here, or manipulation? And if this is what is being touted as proof that the methodology works and is beneficial, can we see the potential for this methodology to go too far and lead to discrimination and some forms of mind programming?

To some extent, good teachers naturally learn to communicate with students in different ways based on their personalities. While I applaud MUSE’s philosophy of attempting to communicate with children in the ways that they respond to best and most comfortably, it is the formalization of this process that scares me. And certainly, when we hear that young children are truly being trained to see the world through the filter of PCM, and potentially can be rebuked if they don’t respond to teachers according to each teacher’s ‘channel,’ then we can understand why parents like our reader above have had serious concerns about PCM in an academic setting.

The reader who emailed us is not alone in their criticism of PCM and its implementation in the school. If you take a look at answers to the question ‘How would you rate your experience at this school?’ on greatschools.org from other parents whose children are/were in MUSE, you will see an interesting pattern: 55 top ‘5 star’ reviews, 16 bottom ‘1 star’ reviews, and only 7 in the 2,3,4 star category. Many of the 5-star reviews are cookie-cutter ‘agree’ comments on pre-written bullet points. Our reader told us, “During the PCM training new parents are asked to submit their reviews which at that point are generally amazing.”

The 1 star reviews tend to be long, thoughtful criticisms of many of the same points made by our reader. Some even bring into question the authenticity of many of the positive reviews: “Notice how the last 7 positive reviews were all posted on the same day, December 18, really??” If you are interested, I would highly recommend going through some of these reviews, both the good and the bad, to help you discern what you think is really going on inside the MUSE school.

The Takeaway

As I mentioned earlier, the stated goals of the MUSE school evoke hope and inspiration. Where the education of our young has long been criticized as a one-size-fits-all, cookie-cutter approach, the MUSE school has stepped boldly towards an approach to respect individual students’ differences and preferences. The only question is whether or not they are stepping too far.

If the high school students at MUSE voted to stop practicing PCM last spring, then one would suspect that this would cause school leaders to strongly question the use of PCM in earlier grades, especially Pre-K, where students obviously don’t have a voice in the matter themselves. Certainly, the MUSE philosophy speaks to a willingness to change and evolve based on the information at hand:

MUSE is ever-evolving. The MUSE community includes creative and critical thinkers who know that flexibility and adaptability are critical keys to our success. We enthusiastically embrace change and consistently challenge ourselves in our ongoing efforts to learn, grow, and improve.

However, our reader’s testimony gives the impression that rather than being listened to and incorporated, dissenting views and criticisms of the current system are shut down and dissenters are shut out of the process. Is the school’s ongoing evolution simply being fostered within an echo chamber? Do we see fear-based control mechanisms reminiscent of the operating structures of a cult?

With the development of the for-profit MUSE Global and the inclusion of PCM as one of the five pillars of the Global schools they are franchising out, we will need to keep our eyes and ears open to determine if the MUSE project is solely about “Inspiring and Preparing Young People to Live Consciously with Themselves, One Another, and the Planet,” or if there is another agenda afoot.

Judicial Watch Sued To Get Footage of The ‘Plane’ Hitting The Pentagon On 9/11 (Video)

In Brief

The Facts:

Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton Tweeted today that he hopes to put 9/11 conspiracy theories to rest with the video of the AA plane hitting the side of the Pentagon on 9/11. The video doesn't seem to show a plane.

Reflect On:

What does the image look like to you in the video? A plane? Or a missile? What seemed to create the hole in the Pentagon? A plane or a missile?

Finally, we can put to rest the theory that a plane hit the pentagon on 9/11. Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch released a video today on his Twitter showing what looks like a Tomahawk cruise missile going into the side of the Pentagon on 9/11. Although Fitton claims this was actually a plane that hit the Pentagon, the evidence doesn’t appear to support this at all.

The ‘plane hitting the Pentagon’ theory has been a question mark for so many people as the camera footage was instantly seized showing the entire event, and there were no plane parts to be found anywhere. Not to mention the plane would have to be flying completely parallel to the ground, JUST skimming the grass to make it into the side of the Pentagon. And of course the hole made in the Pentagon doesn’t match that of a plane at all. See image below.

Image of a Tomahawk cruise missile.

I have honestly been trying to figure out what Fitton is really up to witH this post, because I almost can’t believe he thinks this is a plane which leads me to think he is doing this on purpose to help people see the truth.